This Supreme Court case involved a dispute between two parties over the ownership of land in Pennsylvania. The plaintiff, Lessee of George Clymer, argued that he had purchased the land from George Dawkins and was entitled to possession. However, Dawkins claimed that he never sold the property and still owned it. The court found in favor of Lessee of George Clymer based on evidence presented by both sides which showed that there was an agreement for sale between them and payment had been made for the purchase price. Furthermore, they determined that since no deed or other instrument transferring title had been executed at this time, possession alone could be considered sufficient proof to establish ownership rights under Pennsylvania law. As such, they ruled in favor of Lessee of George Clymer as rightful owner and granted him full title to the disputed property.

In this case, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a deed of trust executed by George Clymer in 1791 was valid. The majority opinion held that it was not because it had been signed without consideration and did not contain any words of conveyance. However, Justice McLean dissented from this decision. He argued that although there were no words of conveyance in the deed, its language clearly indicated an intention to transfer title and thus should be considered valid under Pennsylvania law. Furthermore, he noted that even if the deed lacked consideration or formalities required for a legal contract at common law, equity would still recognize it as binding on both parties since they had acted upon its terms for over fifty years without dispute. In conclusion, Justice McLean believed that the court should uphold the validity of Clymer's deed despite its lack of formality or consideration given at execution